I would recommend that you check the type hints carefully before applying this, in case I messed some of them up. I am not familiar with javax.management library usage. I simply did a lot of looking at method signatures for methods used in the code in the Java library docs.

In particular, I wasn't sure whether connection should be a javax.management.MBeanServer or MBeanServerConnection. MBeanServerConnection is good enough for most of the code, but for the .registerMBean method invocation in register-mbean it needs to be a MBeanServer to avoid reflection. Perhaps it should be MBeanServer everywhere? My main question is whether that would limit the code's generality too much.

Andy Fingerhut
added a comment - 28/Oct/12 11:56 PM jmx-9-eliminate-reflection-v1.txt dated Oct 28 2012 eliminates most reflection warnings from java.jmx.
I would recommend that you check the type hints carefully before applying this, in case I messed some of them up. I am not familiar with javax.management library usage. I simply did a lot of looking at method signatures for methods used in the code in the Java library docs.
In particular, I wasn't sure whether connection should be a javax.management.MBeanServer or MBeanServerConnection. MBeanServerConnection is good enough for most of the code, but for the .registerMBean method invocation in register-mbean it needs to be a MBeanServer to avoid reflection. Perhaps it should be MBeanServer everywhere? My main question is whether that would limit the code's generality too much.

Nick Bailey
added a comment - 16/Dec/12 5:07 PM - edited Well it shouldn't be MBeanServer everywhere. When using the with-connection macro connection is a RemoteMBeanServerConnection and 'registerMBean' isn't a defined method.
I'm thinking perhaps we just change register-mbean to always get the local JMX server rather than using the connection binding. You can't register mbeans with a remote jmx server.